Archives

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Foresight

It appears that the Liberals declining to meet with this private investigator who is apparently the source of info for the Prime Minister and his officials that led them to make the decision turf Helena Guergis from the Cabinet and from the Conservative caucus was a wise move to make, when you read some of the details.

If the Liberals had decided to take the P.I’s call, and release his information publicly, you can be rest assured the Conservatives and Stephen Harper’s reflex and reactive action would have first been screaming “Liberal smear”, and accuse the LPC of politicizing the issue (and then of course engage in some attacks on the PI, which may or may not be warranted). It wouldn’t have mattered in this scenario if the P.I.’s allegations would have ended up being true – that’s just the Conservatives modus operandi.

Now, it is the Conservative government who are getting questioned publicly whether or not they jumped the gun a bit on using this information as “serious and credible” (apparently, because the PI delivered his information to a Conservative lawyer first, and it was passed up the Conservative Party chain of command, that makes the information “credible”), and also simultaneously why Harper didn’t act sooner on the other events going on with Jaffer and Guergis – in essence, getting hit from both sides of the argument, even if it appears contradictory (not that I feel any sympathy for his and the CPC’s predicament).

That leads me to my last point, which I’ve touched on in an earlier blogpost; I find it extremely disturbing that in the Conservative Party mindset, 2nd hand information from a Private Investigator is “serious and credible”, while Richard Colvin’s testimony – the whistleblower on the Afghan Detainees – is not credible.

Further to that, the former translator for the Canadian Forces who alleges even worse activity gets attacked for “drive-by-smears” in Parliament by Defence Minister Peter MacKay, without the government even bothering to at least investigate whether the allegations are true (something the Canadian Forces chief, by the way, is committed to doing. – very laudable on his part, but the Canadian Forces shouldn’t be investigating themselves; the government should be).

Anyone else see a problem here? Anyone?

UPDATE @ 1:34 pm: It looks like the Liberals are seeing that problem, since they’re asking the government in QP the same question I have been asking.

2 comments to Foresight

  • Blues Clair

    “Why does the government choose to believe Big Daddy G but calls Richard Colvin a liar?”

    I know this all very serious, reputations, careers… possible international law violations, ext. But, boy did I laugh, reading that question put forward by Wayne Easter.

  • Big Winnie

    Why did it take the government almost a week to acknowledge that the PM/PMO didn’t formally request an investigation?

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.